unreal talent too bad he was injured so early, had the potential to have more points then gretzky overall.

No.

I voted Orr, too, for the way he changed how defencemen could play the game and, of course, for his unparalleled talents. A brilliant career snuffed out far too early. If he played in this era, his knees would have lasted far longer because of medical advances.

What the hell is Malkin doing over guys like Richard, Beliveau, Shore, Bourque, Harvey, etc.? I get Crosby simply because of his phenomenal potential, but Malkin isn't quite on the same level as Sid and there are legends being snubbed here.

Anyhoo, I always say the greatest of all-time is Gretzky, the most gifted or talented or what have you is Lemieux, and Bobby Orr was the most dominant.

The term 'best' is difficult to define for me, but I'll say this: if I could pick any player in history for a team I was building, my first choice would be Bobby Orr.

Orr, a dominant force at BOTH ends of the ice, wins the scoring title as a defense-man, won Norris, Art Ross, Hart, and Conn Smythe IN THE SAME SEASON. Revolutionized the game, before him defensemen rarely if ever carried the puck or joined the rush. EIGHT CONSECUTIVE Norrris Trophies.

First and only defenceman to score nine hat tricks

First defenceman to score 30 goals (1969–70) and 40 goals in a season (1974–75) in a season.

First player to record 100 assists in a season (1970–71)

Only defenceman to lead the league in scoring (1969–70, 1974–75)

Only player ever to win the Norris Trophy, Art Ross Trophy, Hart Trophy, and Conn Smythe Trophy in one season (1969–70)

Second all-time in career plus-minus rating (+597) (retired as the overall leader; never finished a full season less than +30 since +/- became a statistic beginning with the 1968–69 season)

Fifth in league history in career point-per-game average, all-time, (1.393) (highest among defencemen)

Fifty-ninth overall in league history in career assists and 90th in career points

What the hell is Malkin doing over guys like Richard, Beliveau, Shore, Bourque, Harvey, etc.? I get Crosby simply because of his phenomenal potential, but Malkin isn't quite on the same level as Sid and there are legends being snubbed here.

Anyhoo, I always say the greatest of all-time is Gretzky, the most gifted or talented or what have you is Lemieux, and Bobby Orr was the most dominant.

The term 'best' is difficult to define for me, but I'll say this: if I could pick any player in history for a team I was building, my first choice would be Bobby Orr.

Gretzky has the best vision, Lemieux was the most highly skilled, but Orr was the best all around player, Gretzky and Lemieux were the two best offensive players but weren't too noticeable in their own end.

1. Orr's career was cut short, thus making his career overrated. Ie. We didn't witness his decline. Cut Gretzky's career in half and his status as best ever would be quite undebatable.

2. Gretzky won more cups than Orr. If Orr was as dominant over the rest of the league, then he should've won more cups. It's not like he had no help at all.

3. Gretzky's dominance over the rest of the league, incl. his own teammates, was unmatched. Like, twice as good at points. Was Orr as dominant? No.

4. Gretzky's longer career and ownership of the recordbook is a huge plus. He also popularized hockey in previously untapped markets. Orr just piled it on in the established east coast.

5. Orr might not even the best defenseman. Yes, he owns +/-, but that's a worthless stat. Some consider Doug Harvey the best ever. Lidstrom is there too. Meanwhile, The Great One is undeniably the best ever. Lemieux perhaps being the most-talented, but not best. Howe. Richard. Also not best ever.

Forget about 'it was easy to score in the 80's', too, because it was also easy to score in the 70's. Gretzky just took it to another level. He changed the game so much that goalies had to balloon their equipment, coaches had to devise team-wide defensive strategies to contain one player, and the league as it stands today would be completely different with no Gretzky. Would've gotten by with no Orr. Rushing defenseman? Harvey did that well before Orr.

1. Orr's career was cut short, thus making his career overrated. Ie. We didn't witness his decline. Cut Gretzky's career in half and his status as best ever would be quite undebatable.

You aren't old enough to have witness Orr at all, by the end his knees were so bad he cold barley walk and was stil the best player on the ice

2. Gretzky won more cups than Orr. If Orr was as dominant over the rest of the league, then he should've won more cups. It's not like he had no help at all.

Henri Richard won 11 Cups, I guess he was 3 times as good as Gretzky

3. Gretzky's dominance over the rest of the league, incl. his own teammates, was unmatched. Like, twice as good at points. Was Orr as dominant? No.

Yes he was as dominant, there is more to the game than just points, Orr was also a physical presence, something Gretzky could never be.

4. Gretzky's longer career and ownership of the recordbook is a huge plus. He also popularized hockey in previously untapped markets. Orr just piled it on in the established east coast.

Orr was the only player who could sell out the Cow Palace in Oakland. Oakland and LA were the only teams in the US wwst of the Mississippi in his day.

5. Orr might not even the best defenseman. Yes, he owns +/-, but that's a worthless stat. Some consider Doug Harvey the best ever. Lidstrom is there too. Meanwhile, The Great One is undeniably the best ever. Lemieux perhaps being the most-talented, but not best. Howe. Richard. Also not best ever.

Very deniable, best scorer and best player are two different things, while Gretzky was lighting up the scoreboard (and having his own lit up just as often), most GM's would have taken Bryan Trottier in his prime over Gretzky.

Forget about 'it was easy to score in the 80's', too, because it was also easy to score in the 70's. Gretzky just took it to another level. He changed the game so much that goalies had to balloon their equipment, coaches had to devise team-wide defensive strategies to contain one player, and the league as it stands today would be completely different with no Gretzky. Would've gotten by with no Orr. Rushing defenseman? Harvey did that well before Orr.

The ballooning equipment has nothing to do with Gretzky, that was caused by Brett Hull and the introduction of the synthetic Sticks.

You aren't old enough to have witness Orr at all, by the end his knees were so bad he cold barley walk and was stil the best player on the ice

Henri Richard won 11 Cups, I guess he was 3 times as good as Gretzky

Yes he was as dominant, there is more to the game than just points, Orr was also a physical presence, something Gretzky could never be.

Orr was the only player who could sell out the Cow Palace in Oakland. Oakland and LA were the only teams in the US wwst of the Mississippi in his day.

Very deniable, best scorer and best player are two different things, while Gretzky was lighting up the scoreboard (and having his own lit up just as often), most GM's would have taken Bryan Trottier in his prime over Gretzky.

The ballooning equipment has nothing to do with Gretzky, that was caused by Brett Hull and the introduction of the synthetic Sticks.

It was those five 200+/- point seasons in the Great One heyday that really will never be touched.

In my view, ownership of the record book = Best ever. Why not?

There were only 4 200+ point seasons, TOM.

Gretzky was the best offensive player ever to play the game. No argument there. Best player overall? Not even close.

Gretzky's defending was always questioned as a player throughout his career. Over his final 9 seasons, he was a -86. I know you think that +/- is a worthless stat, but, being only +514 in 20 seasons while scoring 2857 points is not stellar defensive hockey.

Bobby Orr as a defenceman was +597 over only 657 games. 1.4 PPG as a defender put him 5th all-time. He hit. He fought. He played amazing offence and amazing defence (8 straight Norris Trophies).

Gretzky was the best offensive player ever to play the game. No argument there. Best player overall? Not even close.

Gretzky's defending was always questioned as a player throughout his career. Over his final 9 seasons, he was a -86. I know you think that +/- is a worthless stat, but, being only +514 in 20 seasons while scoring 2857 points is not stellar defensive hockey.

Bobby Orr as a defenceman was +597 over only 657 games. 1.4 PPG as a defender put him 5th all-time. He hit. He fought. He played amazing offence and amazing defence (8 straight Norris Trophies).

Lastly, HOF at 31. Youngest ever.

End debate.

Doesn't he hold the record for most Short Handed Goals? I know that isn't difinitive proof, but surely it stands for something.Also his defensive play revolved around him keeping the puck away from his own zone and in the offensive zone.

I'm pretty sure if Gretzky had his career cut short, he'd be in the same boat as Orr as "youngest ever".

Orr, a dominant force at BOTH ends of the ice, wins the scoring title as a defense-man, won Norris, Art Ross, Hart, and Conn Smythe IN THE SAME SEASON. Revolutionized the game, before him defensemen rarely if ever carried the puck or joined the rush. EIGHT CONSECUTIVE Norrris Trophies.

First and only defenceman to score nine hat tricks

First defenceman to score 30 goals (1969–70) and 40 goals in a season (1974–75) in a season.

First player to record 100 assists in a season (1970–71)

Only defenceman to lead the league in scoring (1969–70, 1974–75)

Only player ever to win the Norris Trophy, Art Ross Trophy, Hart Trophy, and Conn Smythe Trophy in one season (1969–70)

Second all-time in career plus-minus rating (+597) (retired as the overall leader; never finished a full season less than +30 since +/- became a statistic beginning with the 1968–69 season)

Fifth in league history in career point-per-game average, all-time, (1.393) (highest among defencemen)

Fifty-ninth overall in league history in career assists and 90th in career points

Not to mention a Stanley Cup winning goal in overtime. Its a joke how Orr isn't on the NHL 13 Legends list.

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs